Technology Vs. Evil

The Race for Security

A Broad Range Of Threats Will Give The Private Sector Plenty Of Government Work

In a quiet Lake Mary office park, Ron Nation and a handful of employees are working to protect America.

Formed three weeks after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, Special Security Inc. is touting software that encrypts and stores a fingerprint in bar codes embedded on a photo identification card, a drivers license or a passport. Each time a user presents it, a computer scans the code and the user's finger to verify the identity.

"Our product helps the good guys -- and lets you know who is in front of you," said Nation, president of the company. "We can prove identities."

Thousands of private companies like Nation's are hoping to help the government -- and make money -- in the multibillion-dollar race for security. The country has too many visitors, too much cargo, too many buildings and borders too expansive to control with manpower alone. So the government is turning to technology to reduce the odds of attack and better manage homeland security.

What hasn't been sorted out yet is how much Washington intends to spend, which technologies are worth supporting first and how much the private sector and local governments will pay to protect themselves if they don't get federal help.

The vast number of threat scenarios only complicates those questions.

"I don't know if the terrorists would rather blow up the Statue of Liberty or make 10,000 people sick," said retired IBM chief scientist Lewis Branscomb, a top member of the National Research Council, a federal advisory panel.

The council is made up of leading scientists, academics and industry leaders. In June, members urged President Bush to be more aggressive in science and technology research for homeland security. They said the nation needs better chemical-attack sensors, vaccines, robotics, information technology and tougher building designs.

Several of the group's recommendations have become part of the new homeland-security strategy and proposed legislation. The ideas include creating an undersecretary for technology, a nonprofit Homeland Security Institute with experts to study infrastructure vulnerabilities and solutions, and appointing a private-sector liaison.

"Two-thirds of all the research and development in the country is being done by the private sector," Branscomb said. "For the government to resolve its problems, it's going to have to rely on private industry."

Industry analysts said they don't expect major new technologies to be discovered for public benefit as during the moon race. Rather, they see the greatest potential in improving existing technologies.

The effort promises to ripple through commerce and industry. Some experts predict it will improve the quality of American life in ways that have nothing to do with fighting terrorism.

"If we support more research for homeland security, we will have positive impacts on dealing with hazardous materials or AIDS research," said Vincent Vitto, president of The Charles Stark Draper Laboratory in Cambridge, Mass.

So-called "dual use" research that will help government and business may include improvements in chemical-sensing technology that can be applied to monitoring air pollution. Better power systems may prevent power failures during storms. Biometric security devices on credit cards, voter registration cards and passports may help reduce identity theft and keep lines moving faster for frequent air travelers.

Improved blast- and fire-resistant building designs and better ventilation systems could protect workers from terrorism attacks or ordinary fires.

Software giant Oracle Corp. and several partners who designed a hospital bed-count monitoring system to spot biological attacks detected a flu outbreak earlier this year in Tampa.

NASA NEEDED HELP, TOO

When NASA aimed for the moon, it enlisted the help of 20,000 contractors and 200 universities to conduct experiments and manufacture equipment for the Apollo program.

Many technologies were needed to develop better fuel cells, guidance systems, spacesuits and heat shields, along with more powerful rockets.

Products such as Velcro and Tang soon made it to the general public and were associated with NASA. Dozens of other so-called NASA commercial spinoffs included weather and communications satellites, miniaturized circuits, scratch-resistant eyeglasses, shock-absorbing athletic shoes and cordless power tools.

"People thought it was just an adventure," said Paul Dembling, NASA's general counsel in the late 1960s. "But . . . the economy has made more money off the spinoffs than we spent going to the moon."

Robert Seamans, the most senior living NASA manager from the 1960s Apollo program, said the moon landings inspired a country and a generation of scientists and researchers. More than 3,000 doctoral degrees in science and engineering were funded by NASA grants during that time.